CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ashfield Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home had effective infection prevention and control measures, including visitor screening, PPE, testing, safe admissions and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- This was not assessed as a separate question in this targeted inspection, although inspectors noted that leaders worked with external health teams and commissioners.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were safe.
The inspection took place on 2 December 2020 and was announced. It was a targeted inspection because the home had a coronavirus outbreak. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control arrangements.
Inspectors were assured that visitors were screened, PPE was available and used safely, and social distancing measures were in place. They were also assured that people were admitted safely, testing was available, and the home could prevent or manage outbreaks.
Staff worked on separate floors to reduce infection risks. The dining room had fewer seats and screens had been added. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Separate staffing arrangements
Staff worked on separate floors and did not mix, which reduced infection risks. Entrances and changing areas had also been rearranged.
“Staff worked on separate floors and did not mix to ensure risks were minimised” from the report
Visitor safety checks
Visitors had temperature checks and were asked relevant questions before entering. PPE, handwashing facilities and clear signs were available.
“All visitors had to undergo a temperature check and answer a range of relevant questions.” from the report
Social distancing measures
The home reduced seating in the dining room and introduced screens to support social distancing.
“For instance, seating had been reduced in the dining room and screens introduced.” from the report
Infection control arrangements
Inspectors were assured that PPE, testing, safe admissions and outbreak management arrangements were in place.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are staff kept separate between floors now, and when would that arrangement change?
- 02How are visitors screened and what infection control measures must they follow before entering?
- 03How often are residents and staff tested, and how are the results managed?
- 04How does the home safely admit new residents and manage any new infection outbreak?
- 05How are PPE supplies and handwashing facilities checked and kept available?
This was an announced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices during a coronavirus outbreak; the service was inspected but not rated and other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 December 2020 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care, but the home was not yet consistently well-led.
Inspectors visited on 30 and 31 July 2019. The first day was unannounced and the second was announced. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and visiting professionals, and checked care plans, medicines records, training, meetings and maintenance records.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective, caring and responsive care. Inspectors found improved records, suitable staffing, safe medicines management and staff who treated people warmly and respectfully. People had choices about food and received support with their health needs.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. The new manager had made significant changes, but inspectors said these improvements were not yet sustained or part of the home's culture. They also recommended further work on the dementia-friendly environment and meaningful activities.
Safe care and medicines
Risk assessments were tailored to people's needs. Medicines were stored, recorded and checked safely, including medicines given covertly or when required.
“Medicines were managed in line with good practice.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff treating people warmly and patiently. People were involved in their care and their dignity, preferences and beliefs were respected.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Improved care records
The new manager had improved risk assessments, care plans and daily records. The records reviewed gave more person-centred information.
“Daily recording information we reviewed was accurate and sufficiently detailed.” from the report
Better staff support
Training compliance had improved substantially, and staff supervisions had restarted. Staff said they felt more supported and able to raise concerns.
“When the manager took over staff training compliance was under 50%. It was currently 85% thanks to their efforts” from the report
Good partnership working
The manager had built useful relationships with health and social care professionals. These professionals said communication and responses to people's needs had improved.
“The manager had developed some strong relationships with local health and social care professionals.” from the report
Leadership improvements not embedded
needs fixingThe well-led rating remained Requires Improvement because positive changes had not yet been sustained. The manager was also awaiting CQC registration and needed further support from the provider.
“This meant, whilst some improvements had been made, these were not yet sustained or embedded as part of the culture.” from the report
Activities and outings
needs fixingPeople enjoyed some activities, but inspectors found the home sometimes struggled to provide meaningful activities for everyone. People and relatives wanted more time outside and more outings.
“We found at times the service struggled to ensure all 45 people had access to activities meaningful to them.” from the report
Dementia-friendly environment
minorThe first floor needed more features designed around best practice for people living with dementia. Inspectors recommended reviewing the layout and decoration.
“The first floor, where the majority of people living with dementia lived, would benefit from further work, such as more tactile areas of interest” from the report
- 01What evidence can you show that the improvements made by the new manager have been sustained?
- 02Who is currently responsible for management, and is the manager now registered with the CQC?
- 03How do you make sure every person has regular activities that are meaningful to them?
- 04What outings and community activities are now available, and how often do they take place?
- 05What changes have been made to the first floor to make it more suitable for people living with dementia?
This was a follow-up inspection of all five quality areas, including the care and the premises, after the previous Requires Improvement rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 August 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Ashfield Court
5 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 November 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
30 live-in carers within about an hour of North Tyneside
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £950 to £1,130 a week. 26 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.